This is my first post and I would be very grateful if someone could reply with possible suggestion/ solution. We filmed an ad with Ursa Mini 4.6k that has to be submitted asap. It was recorded in 4k 16:9, Raw 4:1. ISO 800, 24fps, 180 shutter angle and around f/1.8 - f/2.8. Here is the video:

Exported in Hdnxr 444

1st issue: when exported from Davinci Resolve, footage came out looking much darker and saturated than what we were seeing while editing. (Both on Windows and on Mac) 2nd issue: the massive pixelation that you can see, especially on the background. The footage looks like it came out of a DSLR, badly filmed. Other videos on YouTube don't have it to this extent. Original RAW looked better when we were editing, and exported - sharp and nice, no pixelation. This happened when it was uploaded online.

Can anyone please advice what to do about those 2 problems and what is causing them?

Your footage is dark and has noise so it's "normal" that yotube will make it look quite bad. Not much you can do about it (except some de-noise or using Vimeo which re-encodes with higher bitrates). As suggested- you can also send 4K master to youtube.

Monitoring- again this is normal as Resolve GUI preview is not accurate and should not be used for critical work.What you can do is to generate Viewer LUT which compensates for preview difference or use BM card and feed your preferred (the best if calibrated) monitor.

Charles Bennett wrote:YouTube re-encodes videos at a lower bit rate which does degrade the image. For HD I render and upload at 60 Mbps. As you shot in 4k why not upload a 4k version. It will kook much better on YT.

Dear Charles, Thank you for the advice! That's exactly what we did after and the quality is wonderful!

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Your footage is dark and has noise so it's "normal" that yotube will make it look quite bad. Not much you can do about it (except some de-noise or using Vimeo which re-encodes with higher bitrates). As suggested- you can also send 4K master to youtube.

Monitoring- again this is normal as Resolve GUI preview is not accurate and should not be used for critical work.What you can do is to generate Viewer LUT which compensates for preview difference or use BM card and feed your preferred (the best if calibrated) monitor.

Somehow I'm not a fan of your grading- for me it's "lifeless".

Thank you for your advice! This was actually the first time I worked with UM, as it arrived only a few days earlier and the needed tools to record came on the day of filming. Similarly, it was also the first time I graded RAW film. So I still have things to learn and the export looked different to how I graded it. How would you go about generating a viewer LUT? by testing what changes upon the export?

Charles Bennett wrote:YouTube re-encodes videos at a lower bit rate which does degrade the image. For HD I render and upload at 60 Mbps. As you shot in 4k why not upload a 4k version. It will kook much better on YT.

Dear Charles, May I ask another question, in what codec do you render and upload at 60Mbps? I cannot find the option to choose 60Mbps in DaVinci Resolve.Even though the 4k upload turned out to be the solution, there would be a problem if I was uploading a music video for a band, which would use VEVO (music video distribution platform, on YouTube) for upload, because the highest resolution it accepts is 1080..

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Your footage is dark and has noise so it's "normal" that yotube will make it look quite bad. Not much you can do about it (except some de-noise or using Vimeo which re-encodes with higher bitrates). As suggested- you can also send 4K master to youtube.

Monitoring- again this is normal as Resolve GUI preview is not accurate and should not be used for critical work.What you can do is to generate Viewer LUT which compensates for preview difference or use BM card and feed your preferred (the best if calibrated) monitor.

Somehow I'm not a fan of your grading- for me it's "lifeless".

Thank you for your advice! This was actually the first time I worked with UM, as it arrived only a few days earlier and the needed tools to record came on the day of filming. Similarly, it was also the first time I graded RAW film. So I still have things to learn and the export looked different to how I graded it. How would you go about generating a viewer LUT? by testing what changes upon the export?

Well- math way did not work for me, so it's as simple as generating LUT for Viewer until you have matched view to QT X or website preview. This is far from proper approach though.

Much better one is to use BM card preview, but I'm not sure if you going to get match. It's really down to fact: what will be the main way of watching your videos? If it's youtube then you have to make it look as good as possible in browser, but make sure you take into account PC and Mac (and also try watching in youtube over TV internal app). Maker sure your monitor is color accurate, so your are in the middle of possible color deviations.

Don't use Resolve for final encode.Export ProRes, DNxHR, Cineform and encode with one of the x264 based apps- ffmpeg, Handbrake, Hybrid, VdubMod etc. You can use CRF mode (read about it), which adapts to source nature, so it may use e.g. 50Mbit, but as well as 90Mbit for noisy/grainy source. You can try CRF=15, which should give you good looking master for uploads and not crazy big.